The Hubble is a relic.
James Webb Space Telescope Launch Delayed til 2019
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/james-webb-space-telescope-launch-delayed-2019/
The James Webb Telescope is the "new and improved" version of the Hubble, and it has me rather excited. The Hubble, although it did advance our understanding of the cosmos, had limitations. James Webb will be another major step towards furthering our understanding of both what our universe is, and is not. I think it is just as important to learn what the universe is not in order to have a more complete understanding of what the universe is. And right now, it is estimated that we are only aware of about 5% of the basic concepts that are out there, so we are gonna get some things wrong. Important thing is that we learn from them. Eventually, even the James Webb Space Telescope will outlive its usefulness, and hopefully be replaced by even more advanced technology.
I think that the reason that most of us are here to begin with is that we are almost all above average intelligence. It seems to be one common trait amongst most of us. Our individual perspectives and skillsets will very quite widely. Our ability to process data has led most of us to similar conclusions about things being very wrong with our government and had been unified in our support of Ron Paul and the Libertarian Principles. We dont all have the exact same point of views, and those differences have enabled us to become stronger as a community, even if the interest in Ron Paul himself has waned. I think we usually work best when we enact our ability to entertain opposing points of view without either accepting or rejecting them. We fall apart when individuals say I am right and the rest of you are all wrong, now blindly accept my idea because I dont care about your opinions.
Do Black Holes exist? Math says they probably do. Stephen Hawking said they probably do. But Black Holes are not the and all and be all of our understanding, only a very small part of it. If we look to our past, people used to genuinely believe that the earth was flat because they had no way of knowing that it was not. I dont mean like a hundred years ago, or even Egyptian times, I mean like Cave Man times. Even the Greeks knew the Earth was round, and were even able to give a very good approximation of the distance from the Earth to the Sun. We believed that men could not fly. Then we flew. We also believed that "Time Travel" would occur if you went faster than the speed of sound, not light. Then we broke the sound barrier and found it that we were wrong. We thought we could not put a man in outer space. Then we did. We thought we could not put a man on the moon, yet, we did that too.

Are people finally starting to understand what Ed said?
Edward Snowden: Facebook Is A Surveillance Company Rebranded As "Social Media"
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?520529-Edward-Snowden-Facebook-Is-A-Surveillance-Company-Rebranded-As-quot-Social-Media-quot

The pink is rust- iron. The other minerals are incredibly small quantities- parts per billion for most of them. You would need to consume massive amounts of salt for those to have any significant nutritional effect.
http://www.saltnews.com/chemical-analysis-natural-himalayan-pink-salt/comment-page-1/
Let's consider magnesium. The RDA is 400 mg for men or 0.4g. Himalayan salt contains 0.16 g per kg. If you wanted to get your RDA for magnesium by consuming Himalayan salt, you would need to eat 2.5 kg (5.5 pounds) of that salt every day.

A quarter pound of salt a day (one pound is 454 grams)?
Nutritionally there is no difference between mined table salt and mined Himalayan salt. It is all 99% sodium chloride. Evaporated sea salt may contain more pollutants and contamination. Adding insult to injury, Himalayan Sea Salt may contain useful minerals like plutonium, lead, uranium (but like other "important minerals" are in insignificant quantities).

Theres two words that come to mind about the whole fucking thing.
WOODS
and
THROW
They are NOT making things last longer. They are not releasing new models that fix existing problems. They are not trying to make things better. They are not interested in making things that break less. What they are trying to do is even worse. They are trying to design everything to become obsolete as soon as possible. They are trying to make things interconnected so they can sell data that is collected. They are trying to use everything as an advertising platform. They are trying to make things crappy and cheap so they break intentionally. They are trying to overcharge for cheaper and cheaper crap. They are not giving us useful features while overloading us with things we dont want.
This is not the way the future is supposed to be. The future is supposed to be actually better than what we had before, not worse. If we ever do make a star ship, we will be lucky if it makes it as far as the moon without needing to be hauled back in for a major repair. Their machines make us dumber than we ever have been. They try to recommend we buy products, not because we need them, but purely so they can make money on selling us shit we dont need and cant afford that is actually worse than the previous model. These self driving cars are merely surveillance tools that will be shut off at the first sign of revolution against the Corporation State.

I have already pointed out that that is all incorrect. Except the part where the Fed purchase US Treasury notes on the open market (or did purchase- they stopped buying in 2014 except to replace those which are maturing). They don't charge interest on them- they do get paid the same interest on them as all US Treasury holders do- but they give that money back so really they don't "charge" any interest on them. Thety aren't handing out $80 billion to banks to "play with it" (banks have only $20 million borrowed and it is short term so they aren't "playing with it")

A bank gives the Fed collateral for a short term loan. They are highly unlikely to use that money to make an investment into purchasing stocks. The bank is allowed to buy stocks. The Federal Reserve isn't. Banks have only borrowed $20 million so they aren't making billions doing what you suggest.
What is your point?

Their books are regularly audited. But don't take my word for that. https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm
Link to their audit page: https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/audited-annual-financial-statements.htm